Re: opty / Re: Additional thoughts about the 148 response to USPTO
in response to
by
posted on
Jun 01, 2011 01:52AM
That you would desire to ban me for posting an ironic observation, yet you would conversely support those who would attack, disparage and completely vilify someone based on those attackers own misguided and unsupported theories says more than enough.
For someone who once "begged" me not to point out another posters outright lies because of what it might reveal, your response adds to the irony.
It's comical that with all the implied intrigue and deception that transpired regarding the posting of that supposedly critiically informative and MMP supportive PACER, that we sit at under 9 cents lo these many weeks and months later with that juicy pro-MMP info so well illuminated by the "controversy". Boy, you'd think that our company might have at least benefited through the restoration of a small bit of value that this critically valuable information and the "potential" in infringement dollars it represented. At least by the way it was spun by those who ballyhooed it so. Yet, like most things PTSC, the company has found a way to support the market's minimazation of PTSC's value.
I'm offended that you find it offensive, but more so, I'm offended that shareholders have allowed PTSC continue to serve its BOD and Managers rather than its owners. Enjoy your evening.